David Rabadà i Vives, paleontologist, PhD in Geological Sciences, and science communicator, has just published *The Historical Jesus: 2000 Years of Additions* (Hilos de Azul, 2025). In this well-documented essay, he distinguishes between the figure of Jesus of Nazareth from the first-century Christ constructed by tradition, theology, and power over the centuries. We spoke with him about his methodology, the most significant “additions,” and the continued relevance of this distinction in a world where the image of Jesus is still being manipulated.

You are a paleontologist and are used to reconstructing the past from fragmentary evidence. How did you transfer the tools of stratigraphy, context analysis, and dating to the study of Jesus of Nazareth?

As a Doctor of Geological Sciences, I have simply applied the rigor of the scientific method and historical objectivity to the analysis of biblical and historical texts, primarily using the principle of parsimony—or Occam’s razor—which holds that the simplest and most logical explanation that resolves the most mysteries is the closest to reality. Just as in stratigraphy, the book *The Historical Jesus* seeks to organize the facts, discarding childish fantasies—magical tales or later theological additions—to bring us closer to the historical core of the figure called Jesus,  Yasú Nazara .

If you had to point to three major “layers” of additions that have most transformed the image of the real Jesus—one theological, one iconographic, and one political—which would you choose and why do they continue to have such a strong influence on how we perceive Jesus today?

In the book *The Historical Jesus*, we find three major additions that, among many others, distorted the true character of Jesus of Nazareth. On a theological level, we can cite the deification of Christ and the creation of the dogma of the Holy Trinity, both human creations imposed by the Council of Nicaea in the 4th century. Jesus, by human decision, went from being a Jewish man to being God within the Holy Trinity.

Another addition, this time at the iconographic level, is the creation of the classic image of a Caucasian Jesus with long hair, in accordance with the Shroud of Turin, a forgery since carbon-14 dating placed it between the 13th and 14th centuries. Jesus, had he existed, would have been a man with features typical of his region, brown-skinned and Palestinian. Clearly, the Shroud of Turin replaced the original Semitic Jesus with a man of Mediterranean features, fair skin, and even blue eyes.

Finally, on a political level, an image far removed from Jesus was also invented, created by someone who never knew him in life, who didn’t learn about him from his disciples, and who was rejected by the early Jewish communities that continued the teachings of the Nazarene. This figure was Paul—Saul—who invented Christian pacifism, the incarnate resurrection of Jesus, Christian machismo, the universal mission of Jesus, and the exoneration of Rome in his murder. According to the sources, the expression “Empire of Yahweh”—often mistranslated as “Kingdom of God”—represented the core of the preaching of the historical Jesus and had a profoundly political, nationalist, and religious meaning in the context of first-century Judea. For some Jews of the time, the land of Israel belonged exclusively to Yahweh under the Covenant. Therefore, wanting the Empire of Yahweh meant reclaiming the sovereignty of the nation and expelling the foreign occupiers (the Romans) who had desecrated the holy land. The proclamation of Yahweh’s Empire was what truly transformed Jesus into a dangerous figure for the stability of the  Pax Romana , which is why he was arrested and executed on charges of sedition and high treason for presenting himself as a claimant to the title of “King of the Jews.” In other words, Paul transformed the insurgent Jesus, executed for sedition on the cross, into a Christ the “Prince of Peace,” even though Jesus never intended to found a new religion called Christianity; at most, he wanted to reform his Jewish society. Read the Gospels, and the matter becomes quite clear. Paul definitely facilitated the expansion of Christianity in the Roman Empire with a Christ suited to that purpose, but far removed from the original Jewish Jesus.

The classic image of Jesus (fair skin, long wavy hair, well-groomed beard, serene expression) is largely a later cultural creation. At what historical moments did this “visual brand” become established, and what does it reveal about how each era projects its own ideals of holiness, beauty, and authority?

The Gospels contain no physical description of Jesus, leaving a void that had to be filled with the icon of a long-haired, bearded, and Caucasian-looking Jesus. This image took shape primarily from the 4th century onward, under the reign of Emperor Constantine, when Christianity became part of the imperial power. It was later reinforced in the Middle Ages with the creation of relics such as the Shroud of Turin. All of this reveals how each era projects its ideals, where the medieval Church needed a reliable icon for the faith, creating for this purpose an individual with European features completely foreign to the indigenous Jewish people of Judea—a Palestinian, in short.

For many Catholics, distinguishing between the historical Jesus and the Christ of faith can be unsettling. How would you explain to a believing reader that your book, far from weakening faith, can help them live it in a more mature way, free from cultural biases?

First and foremost, the book *The Historical Jesus* does not attack faith or the Christian God; it merely refutes all the additions about Jesus that two thousand years of beliefs have contributed. Furthermore, and I have said this countless times in my classes, faith and science are useful separately, but their combination occasionally generates lies and contradictions. Knowledge of historical truth does not seek to weaken spirituality, but rather to liberate the individual from ideological manipulation and ignorance. According to this essay, faith can reduce anxiety about life, but only historical truth frees us from cultural manipulation. According to the  Gospel of Philip,  Jesus said:  “If you know the truth, the truth will set you free.” Ignorance is slavery; knowledge is freedom . 

Apart from the Gospels and a few Roman and Jewish references, the documentary record of Jesus in his time is surprisingly scarce. What does this “gap” tell us about the true extent of his movement in the first century, and how does it explain how a seemingly marginal phenomenon ended up transforming the Roman Empire?

The book *The Historical Jesus* makes it clear that before the 2nd century, we have no physical evidence of Jesus, and therefore there is no direct archaeological evidence or contemporary chronicles from the 1st century about the Nazarene, nor are there any Gospels, since they only began to be written in the 2nd century. In other words, when they were written, decades had passed since any living witnesses of Jesus survived. This lack of documentation is explained by the fact that Jesus was a humble, illiterate commoner from a marginal region on the shores of the Sea of ​​Galilee. That is to say, neither he nor his followers knew how to read or write, and therefore they left no record of him. The movement simply triumphed because the Roman citizen Paul of Tarsus, who could read and write, reinvented the message for the Gentiles, creating a universal and divine Christ who fit better into the Greco-Roman world than the Jewish nationalist Jesus. Finally, imperial support in the 4th century—from Constantine—made it the official religion.

Just a few days ago, President Donald Trump posted (and subsequently deleted) AI-generated images depicting him as a Christ figure—healing the sick or being embraced by Jesus—amid his public clash with Pope Leo XIV. Do you see these new political “additions” as a continuation of the same mechanisms of appropriation and use of the symbol of Jesus that you analyze in your book over the course of 2,000 years?

Trump hasn’t invented anything new. The book *The Historical Jesus* perfectly describes identical political mechanisms from the past. The use of Jesus’s image to legitimize political power and unite the masses, just as Constantine did by using the cross on his shields, remains relevant with Trump’s messianic imagery. The appropriation of Jesus’s symbol has been a historical constant for promoting personal or state interests, making people believe the unbelievable through repetition. Nazi Germany’s Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, said that ” if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually believe it .” It’s worth remembering that Hitler also appropriated Jesus’s symbol, as detailed in the book, to promote his political objectives. Do you want more historical examples?

In a world where artificial intelligence allows us to generate images and narratives of Jesus on demand, are we entering an even more accelerated phase of “additions”? What challenges does this pose to churches, theology, and our very understanding of the historical figure of Jesus?

Yes, we are entering an even more precipitous stage of lies, but we also have greater access to verified facts. With an education system based on a rigorous curriculum and the transmission of truthful knowledge, further embellishments to history can be avoided, but unfortunately, European education systems do not foster this, and I predict that major lies will become part of not just a religion, but also a cornerstone of populist policies.

As for the challenges this poses to the Church, they will be no different from those faced by early Christianity with other competitors. Here, whoever wields the most power will be the most effective at spreading their cause, just as the canonical gospels prevailed over the apocryphal ones. All tell stories, but some do it better and with more resources. This presents a fundamental challenge for churches: they continue to base faith on archetypes similar to movie scripts to generate empathy, but increasingly distance themselves from understanding the human Jesus, who in himself would be enough to inspire faith in his teachings. History is full of pressures that have expanded religions more than reason. Examples include the Roman Empire and its divine Caesar, the Temple of Jerusalem and its Yahweh, the early Church and its Lord-God, the Inquisition and its heresies, the Crusades and their raids, missions and armies, and the Nazis and their neo-Christianity. They all always ended up doing the same thing: inventing concepts, making people believe the unbelievable, and promoting many believers. What if we try something closer to the historical Jesus?

To conclude: If the historical Jesus of the first century could read your book today, what do you think would surprise him most about the 2,000 years of accumulated additions about him? And, above all, what central message of his life and teachings do you believe remains fully valid and challenging for a Catholic believer in the 21st century?

The book makes it clear that Jesus would have been surprised by his own deification—he never called himself God nor founded a religion—and by the opulent ecclesiastical hierarchy, something he himself criticized in the Sanhedrin. The message that remains valid and challenging is his fight for social justice, equal rights, and solidarity with the weak against the powerful. At the time, these powerful forces included Rome, which executed him for being a Jewish nationalist; Herod and his followers, who murdered his mentor, John the Baptist; and finally, the Jewish elite who lived like Rome and wanted to avoid trouble. The Empire of Yahweh preached by Jesus implied the end of social inequalities and the corruption of the elites (like the Sanhedrin and Herod’s followers) who collaborated with Rome to enrich themselves at the expense of the poor. If all believers today understood all this, some might decide to leave the Church, though not their faith in Jesus. Believing in Jesus remains perfectly legitimate and respectable, but believing in faith-based interpretations of Jesus is very slippery. Only by educating people through curiosity about facts, objective knowledge, and critical analysis can we avoid further religious additions. Perhaps this is what Jesus intended two thousand years ago: ”  If you recognize the truth, the truth will set you free. Ignorance is slavery, knowledge is freedom”  ( Logion 123, Gospel of Philip ). The problem is that very few followed him.

David Rabadà i Vives (Barcelona, ​​1967) , paleontologist and science communicator, earned his PhD in Geological Sciences in 1995 from the University of Barcelona, ​​where he worked on various scientific projects for the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC). He has received special mention in the UPC Prize (1999), the Albert Pérez Bastardas Prize (2003), the Natura Ciutat de Valls Prize (1992 and 1995), was a finalist in the Ciutat de Viladecans Prize (2005), and was also a finalist for the Guillem Bellavista Prize (2021). He has published the books *Un Déu per als ignorants* (2000), *Les cinc cares de la Terra* (2005), *Educar, educamos todos* (2007), *Quién fracasó con el Fracaso Escolar* (2008), *Cristo Mito al Desnudo* (2015), *Prejuicios y Evolución Humana* (2020), *Evolució a la Terra* (2022), *La Palma Bonita* (2022), *La Mirada de Islandia* (2023), *Educación Basurizada* (2025), and *El Jesús Histórico* (2025). The Autonomous University of Barcelona will soon publish his book *Evolución o Involución Humana*. He is currently a professor of Geological Sciences, a member of the Episteme Foundation, vice president of SIGMADOT, an academician of the ACVC, and press officer for ASPEPC.SPS.